4 ms·
(Warning: gross simplification ahead) Because they don’t make (practically) any money on CD sales, streaming, or radio plays, the record labels do. That one pe
by orev 2y ago
(Warning: gross simplification ahead)
Because they don’t make (practically) any money on CD sales, streaming, or radio plays, the record labels do. That one performance is recorded, and they get paid for that performance and the record label owns it. Any time that recording is played, it’s seen as a marketing to sell the album.
The artist makes their money through each live performance, so it makes sense for them to change things up so concert goers have an incentive to see something new.
- Supernaut 2y ago> they don’t make (practically) any money on CD sales No, not any more, because Napster and the other IP-theft networks that followed in its wake destroyed that revenue model, both for the musicians and the record companies. But before that, many popular musicians made very large fortunes purely from record sales. So much so that some of them, most famously the Beatles, were able to give up live performance altogether. Also, I would suggest that what draws typical audiences to live performance is not the hope of hearing the lead guitarist bust out hot new variations on his solos. What they enjoy is the communal experience and the thrill of seeing famous people in the flesh.